Hosting isn't free and they're not forcing anyone to host it there, there are alternative platforms.
It's a pretty fair decision that avoids the legal system entirely. The person who uploaded the video can always request to have it taken down.
I found a page of other unfair practices that google is using to steal our cash: https://fliki.ai/blog/new-youtube-monetization-requirements
Russel Brand is still allowed to view youtubes, even post videos. The company that has built, maintained and spent to allow all that has removed the ability from a user user to monetize his videos, but hasn't even silenced him.
I don't know if shutting down his channel and removing all the videos (which Google has a legal right to do) would be better.
Personally, I say absolutely yes. Particularly because they'll still platform questionable content, sell ad space against it, and take the payout all for themselves.
It's not "saving" their customers (advertisers). It's denying wages to the producer.
I can't see it as anything other than virtue signaling, coupled with a profit.
Russell Brand has 1.4 million followers on Rumble